William E Ferrand Post 2297 VFW
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 590994348
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Lakeland, FL, USA
- Phone
- 8636878146
- Rating
- 46
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Military, Veterans' Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $214,381
- Expenses
- $93,463
- Assets
- $209,439
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
People named in this filing
- Henry B Hammond (Quartermaster)
- Charles Dillow Jr (Commander)
- William G Sanders (Sr Vice Commander)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Provide congenial recreation for members of the post and their guestActivities are conducted on site.100% of activities are on site 100% of the time.
What it reported doing in 2025
Supported Vets finacially through the Help and Vet program totaling $3,540 The organization coordinated the placement of holiday wreaths on the headstones of fallen US veterans $2,000 Donated an additional $2,450 to other non-profit organizations as well a $2,000 to St Judes.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 97% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 63% for direct work, and 37% for member benefits.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 14
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Accountability: 30
- Sustainability: 78
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 8%; rating input score 8
- Program expense ratio: 29.6%; rating input score 30
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 56.4%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.24; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 8% of revenue deployed · 29.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $28K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 8/100.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 30/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.